Ramos et al v. Giltner Transportation, Inc. et al

Filing 30

ORDER granting 28 Stipulation and Order for FRCP Rule 35 Examination of Plaintiff Victoriano Ramos. See Order for further details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 5/9/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LOE)

Download PDF
Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 28 Filed 05/06/22 Page 1 of 4 30 05/09/22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 MICHAEL C. HETEY, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 5668 HAROLD J. ROSENTHAL, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10208 THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK BALKENBUSH & EISINGER 1100 East Bridger Avenue Las Vegas, NV 89101-5315 Tel.: (702) 366-0622 Fax: (702) 366-0327 mch@thorndal.com hjr@thorndal.com Attorneys for Defendants GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.; GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.; and GILTNER, INC. 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 VICTORIANO RAMOS; THERESA RAMOS, 13 Plaintiffs, 14 vs. 15 GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.; GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.; GILTNER, INC.; PROGRESSIVE LOGISTICS, INC.; GARY ROBERT NAIR; DOES 1-200; and ROES 201-300, 16 17 CASE NO. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW 18 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR FRCP RULE 35 EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF VICTORIANO RAMOS Defendants. 19 20 21 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR FRCP RULE 35 EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF VICTORIANO RAMOS IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs 22 23 VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA RAMOS and Defendants GILTNER 24 TRANSPORTATION, INC.; GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.; and GILTNER, INC., 25 by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, that the Plaintiff VICTORIANO 26 RAMOS is willing to undergo a FRCP Rule 35 Examination with the agreed-upon medical 27 physicians and the stipulated conditions set forth below: 28 /// -1Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al. STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE FRCP RULE 35 EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF VICTORIANO RAMOS Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 28 Filed 05/06/22 Page 2 of 4 30 05/09/22 1. 1 2 assistant who speaks Spanish who will translate and assist in the Rule 35 examination process. 2. 3 4 3. The Rule 35 Examination will be conducted between 9:00am and 6:00pm with a break for lunch and other short comfort breaks during the day as needed by the Plaintiff. 4. 7 8 The Rule 35 Examination will take place on June 19, 2022, at the Hyatt Regency located at 6225 West Century Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90045. 5 6 The Rule 35 Examination will be conducted by Dr. Thomas Kinsora and an Dr. Kinsora will provide the intake forms to Plaintiffs’ Counsel and they need to be completely filled out and returned two weeks prior to the Rule 35 examination. 5. 9 The day will begin with an interview that should last approximately 90 minutes 10 and this portion may be audio recorded by the Plaintiff if he so desires. No outside observers 11 can be present and the testing portion of the examination following the interview cannot be 12 audio recorded in any manner. 6. 13 The testing portion of the Rule 35 examination will consist of various testing 14 batteries that are commonly accepted in the medical and scientific communities and will 15 depend upon the cognitive abilities of Plaintiff VICTORIANO RAMOS and the results of the 16 interview on the day of the Rule 35 examination. 7. 17 Following the Rule 35 examination, Dr. Kinsora will share the raw testing data 18 directly with a Neuropsychologist retained by Plaintiffs, but this raw testing data is not to be 19 shared with other parties. 8. 20 Following the Rule 35 examination, Dr. Kinsora will prepare a written report of 21 his findings and opinions and this report will be provided to the parties within 30 days. 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// -2Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al. STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE FRCP RULE 35 EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF VICTORIANO RAMOS Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 28 Filed 05/06/22 Page 3 of 4 30 05/09/22 1 9. Dr. Kinsora shall not ask any liability questions regarding the subject accident. 2 3 IT IS SO STIPULATED. DATED this 5th day of May 2022. DATED this 5th day of May 2022. 5 DORDICK LAW CORPORATION LAW OFFICE OF PETER GOLDSTEIN 6 /s/ Gary A. Dordick, Esq. /s/ Peter Goldstein, Esq. Elizbeth A. Hernandez, Esq. (Pro Hac Vice) California Bar No. 204322 Gary A. Dordick, Esq. (Pro Hac Vice) California Bar No. 128008 509 South Beverly Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Attorneys for Plaintiffs VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA RAMOS Peter Goldstein, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 6992 10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 Attorney for Plaintiffs VICTORIANO RAMOS and THERESA RAMOS 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 DATED this 5th day of May 2022. THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK BALKENBUSH & EISINGER 15 /s/ Michael C. Hetey, Esq. 16 Michael C. Hetey, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 5668 Harold J. Rosenthal, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10208 1100 E. Bridger Avenue Las Vegas, NV 89125-2070 Attorneys for Defendants GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.; GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC.; and GILTNER, INC 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al. STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE FRCP RULE 35 EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF VICTORIANO RAMOS Case 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW Document 28 Filed 05/06/22 Page 4 of 4 30 05/09/22 1 2 3 4 ORDER Plaintiff VICTORIANO RAMOS will appear for a FRCP Rule 35 Examination with Dr. Thomas Kinsora pursuant to the stipulated conditions listed above. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: May 9, 2022. 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 Respectfully Submitted By: 10 /s/ Michael C. Hetey, Esq. 11 MICHAEL C. HETEY, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 5668 HAROLD J. ROSENTHAL, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 10208 THORNDAL ARMSTRONG DELK BALKENBUSH & EISINGER 1100 East Bridger Avenue Las Vegas, NV 89101-5315 Attorneys for Defendants GILTNER TRANSPORTATION, INC.; GILTNER LOGISTICS SERVICES INC. and GILTNER, INC 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4Case No. 2:21-cv-01446-RFB-BNW – Ramos v Giltner Transportation, et al. STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE FRCP RULE 35 EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF VICTORIANO RAMOS

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?